Auto-attack. Why?

[Easton]

* Easton listens to all arguments

@a few people: Anyone who said "It's not cheating, they're using game mechanics. let them be."-- i disagree. I think if a certain game mechanic can be improved, then we should discuss it, and make our suggestions. Whether the devs listen or not is another issue. It would be completely up to them. But i feel that this mechanic is quite useless, unless you want to level up real fast by not really participating in the game. for me, it lowers the quality of the game by disallowing me to hold a normal conversation with someone because they "should have gone to bed hours ago" and have decided to use a, in my eyes, faulty, game mechanic to gain some PP.

I do agree that these people are not cheating, don't get me wrong. They are taking advantage of a game mechanic which isn't cheating technically, because they aren't taking advantage of a bug.. However, this doesn't mean the game mechanic has been perfected. Nor does it mean that these people are high quality players. Since i am a tester, as are we all, (i hope) i find it as my duty to report something that i find needs to be improved.

I know that just abuot every aspect of this game needs improvement, believe me, i'm the first to tell a person who complains that the game is in its alpha stages and there's tons of time before we get anything near the "finished" product. The combat system is one that needs improvement as well. This simply an issue that has greater importance because of its OOC characteristics.

I don't know.. this issue just came up yesterday, and i found it kind of surprising. and i find it more surprising that people knew about/participated in this kind of thing.. C'mon people! Testers first, players later.. right?

Easton

[Peacer]

* Easton listens to all arguments

@a few people: Anyone who said "It's not cheating, they're using game mechanics. let them be."-- i disagree. I think if a certain game mechanic can be improved, then we should discuss it, and make our suggestions. Whether the devs listen or not is another issue. It would be completely up to them. But i feel that this mechanic is quite useless, unless you want to level up real fast by not really participating in the game. for me, it lowers the quality of the game by disallowing me to hold a normal conversation with someone because they "should have gone to bed hours ago" and have decided to use a, in my eyes, faulty, game mechanic to gain some PP.

I do agree that these people are not cheating, don't get me wrong. They are taking advantage of a game mechanic which isn't cheating technically, because they aren't taking advantage of a bug.. However, this doesn't mean the game mechanic has been perfected. Nor does it mean that these people are high quality players. Since i am a tester, as are we all, (i hope) i find it as my duty to report something that i find needs to be improved.

I know that just abuot every aspect of this game needs improvement, believe me, i'm the first to tell a person who complains that the game is in its alpha stages and there's tons of time before we get anything near the "finished" product. The combat system is one that needs improvement as well. This simply an issue that has greater importance because of its OOC characteristics.

I don't know.. this issue just came up yesterday, and i found it kind of surprising. and i find it more surprising that people knew about/participated in this kind of thing.. C'mon people! Testers first, players later.. right?

Easton

I see what your point is and i also see why you call it cheating, you go afk while you level up without doing anything for it as the older players have done with standing at a rogue saving up pp arguing about ks'ing etc. etc. etc. But from your point of view where you see it's cheating, you are wrong, it's not a bug and i find it a quite realistic game mechanic that the character hits back if someone hits them, unless you are a ghandi type what would be nice though is when magic get's stronger, it would be nice to have it adjustable turnoffable and such to determine what kind of attack and turn if off depending on your character's personality.

however your last two paragraphs i agree with

-Peacer

[LigH]

@ Wired_Crawler:

I just checked with a rather weak character on the weak dwarf Mercenary. Trained in Light armor, and fought him in full defensive stance (what people would do to quickly level armor). I stayed in full defensive stance all the time until I got too bored to attack.

Then I got hit, and changed to normal stance right after.

And I can again switch between bloody, aggressive, normal, and defensive - without problems, during a fight. This was not possible during that time when we had so many problems with auto-defense.

[eldoth_terevan]

Monster attacks character. Character hits back. Monster dies. Monster respawns. Monster attacks character. This is not a game mechanics problem.

[Ralas]

I re-checked the rules, and I was mistaken.  The rule I was thinking of is this: "You may not create "bots" or automation programs with the purpose of profiteering or advancing unattended," which unfortunately deals specifically with bots rather than flaws in game mechanics.  This is a technicality: IMO, the rule is desgined to prevent any unattended advancement.  This looks to me to be an oversight. 
It's explotation of a bug, but of a flaw.  So it's not cheating like going crazy when the NPCs are down and can't fight back isn't cheating.  Neither is a bug per se, and neither is speficically against the rules (yet), but both take advantage of the unforseen effcts, hence flaws, of certain game mechanics.  Neither should be done.

[eldoth_terevan]

Monster attacks character. Character hits back. Monster dies. Monster respawns. Monster attacks character. This is not a flaw.

[Karyuu]

Which doesn't mean that it's a perfect situation either ;)

Dynamic spawns would fix so very much.

[Peacer]

Which doesn't mean that it's a perfect situation either

Dynamic spawns would fix so very much.

indeed, but would require me to do something too <.< *cough secret*

[Croconil]

...i find it a quite realistic game mechanic that the character hits back if someone hits them, unless you are a ghandi type

Haha. That is a quote

Which doesn't mean that it's a perfect situation either

Dynamic spawns would fix so very much.

indeed, but would require me to do something too <.< *cough secret*

oooo. Tell us Peacer

[Peacer]

...i find it a quite realistic game mechanic that the character hits back if someone hits them, unless you are a ghandi type

Haha. That is a quote

Which doesn't mean that it's a perfect situation either

Dynamic spawns would fix so very much.

indeed, but would require me to do something too <.< *cough secret*

oooo. Tell us Peacer

feel free to put it in your sig(c)

nevaah >:| guild secret

[Nikodemus]

And so we have again the same problem. They refuse to call it cheating because comp games approach just made them blind on everything else. I gave an examle of cheating when playing a card game. People just don't understand that because all you do in PS is roleplaying, thus playing a role in real for your character world, when you are taking advantage on someone else, you are cheating. Not your character, because it can't as you are going ooc doing somethink what you arent supposed to do.
People just  don't understamd the concept of RP. It is so unusual that you get used to all what is connected with it, sometimes for years. Most of the human population don't even know whats RPing, some of them are unable to undestand, because of various reasons.
We need to use our brain rather than rely on rules, because these, are only for people who refuse to think logicaly, to have fun with cost of others. The rules were made by people smarter than those who was breaking them.
Also, many poeple thinking they are not cheating, think that what they do is completly right. No cheating, so no problem at all.

[Mindari]

http://www.thenoobcomic.com/index.html

this seems relevent at least untill the comic is updated

[Croconil]

feel free to put it in your sig(c)

nevaah >:| guild secret

Ohhhh.

[Peacer]

feel free to put it in your sig(c)

nevaah >:| guild secret

Ohhhh.

only people joining us will know <.<

[eldoth_terevan]

No it does not mean that this is perfect, Karyuu, I agree with you on that. As I agree with Ralas' feeling on this. But these discussions tend to go all over the place the place in here. So this is the situation then:

1) There is not a problem with game mechanics here, it is not a flaw in the game, it is not cheating per se.
2) The problem is one of players being selfish and camping spawn for hours and not giving other players a chance.

Right now you can have either a non-aggressive MOB, or an agressive MOB. There are no other options that I can see. Dynamic spawns will fix the problem ... great so there is no reason for me to go about insulting other players or flaming them in game or on the board for this. I am not overly concerned about the conduct of other players unless it is totally OOC rude.

If I think someone is doing this, I will (and have) speak politely to the player in game. If they say nothing I will speak with them again in a little while. If they say nothing at that time, and they have been there for a long time, then I might file a petition about this in game. But they are doing something that has not been specifically disallowed by game mechanics, and should be addressed by a GM in game. And it should be addressed by a GM in a reasonable and mature manner...

I have given up spawns innumerable times in game. I roleplay giving up the spawn as well. Standing around at a spawn is really boring and there is always something else to do in game. So perhaps the standing guideline should be that more powerful players are recommended to give up spawn points when asked, and to be aware and have regard for other players in game.

I am just not into complaining about these sorts of things, I have faith that problems like this will be addressed by game mechanics in the future when the foundation of the game has been completed.

Peacer and Ralas' and others brought up some good suggestions in this thread that should be discussed, but those would be more appropriate in the wish list forum I think...